beta
Text
1. Of the distribution schedule prepared on July 8, 2014 by the above court with respect to the application for auction filed by Seoul Northern District Court C and D (Dual).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 18, 2013, Seoul Northern District Court C, Seoul Northern District Court C, and D voluntarily auction procedure (joint auction procedure) was initiated on April 18, 2013, with respect to the F apartment No. 202, 712 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).
B. In the above auction procedure, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule in the order of 251,49,825 won, 259,825 won, and 99,080,031 won, 25,000 won, 25,000 won, 360 won, 760 won, 40 won, 760 won, 35,000 won, 40 won, 760 won, 760 won, 40 won, 2,80 won, 80, 614, 5 won, 66, 774 won, 106, 106, 106, 320,546 won, 6, 96, 774, 5 won, 606, 106, and 106,546 won, to the transferee of the new bank that was the mortgagee of the first priority.
C. On December 30, 201, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100,000,00 to E, and set up a collateral security (the maximum debt amount of KRW 130,000,000 with respect to the apartment of this case) and raised an objection against the Defendant’s total amount of dividends by attending the auction procedure of this case on July 8, 201, as the mortgagee who submitted the claim statement of KRW 170,684,931 to the executing court, and on the date of distribution.
【Reasons for Recognition】 Each entry of Evidence Nos. 6, 7, 9, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is not a genuine small-sum lessee who is worth protecting under the Housing Lease Protection Act.
As to this, the defendant's husband He purchased the apartment of this case on September 29, 1998, and his family continued to reside in the apartment of this case, and upon the commencement of the auction procedure on the apartment of this case with H's obligation, the defendant's family members continued to reside in the apartment of this case, and upon the commencement of the auction procedure on the apartment of this case with H's obligation, they borrowed money from E